Call me crazy, but I love crackpot things like this. I work with people who boycott anything French or Canadian, buy W ketchup, and still call them "freedom fries". Nothing brightens my day more than crap like this, if only because people on both sides take it so damn seriously.

I find it funny that some self-important actors might boycott Republicans. It's just as funny that there are going to be people in the conservative community who will devote entire television shows, newspaper columns, and, I suppose, message board topics to this so-called "outrage". People, it's broadway! It's not like it's a hospital or police officers.

And, this is just from personal experience, I know a lot more Republicans who go to broadway shows than liberals.

There are many things that have deserved boycots. Just look at the civil rights movement. But now, in 2004, Republicans? Half the people involved in our government? Yeah, that makes total sense.

Originally posted by RudoublesedoublelIt is sickening that they would refuse to perform for Republicans.

It really is the height of hypocricy. Of course, many won't see it that way because this is "enlightened" bigotry.

Are you guys all on crack? We're talking about Broadway performers here, right? What are the chances these performers are going to want to be connected in anyway with an official Party Convention for a bunch of politicians who want to write the rights of gay Americans out of the constitution. Refusing to perform for these politicians is their own way of peaceful protest.

Originally posted by StiltonRefusing to perform for these politicians is their own way of peaceful protest.

And a form of discrimination.

Grimis, you crack me up. You argue like a little kid, nothing but repetitious insistence. You think you’re being clever by throwing the word “discrimination” in the faces of a bunch of singers and dancers, when you know well their reasons for refusing to be a part of the RNC are totally valid, and legal. Boycotts and peaceful protests are legal aren’t they? Part of basic freedoms? No? They’re aren’t refusing to perform for them because of WHO they are, they are refusing to support a political ideal they do not abide with, and that ISN’T DISCRIMINATION, and I think you know this, but the giddy glee you derive from taking pot shots at everyone who disagrees with your politics is getting the best of you. Take a deep breath now.

Originally posted by StiltonThey’re aren’t refusing to perform for them because of WHO they are, they are refusing to support a political ideal they do not abide with, and that ISN’T DISCRIMINATION, and I think you know this, but the giddy glee you derive from taking pot shots at everyone who disagrees with your politics is getting the best of you.

Let's ask Webster: the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually b : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment

They are prejudicially refusing to perform for people who are Republicans. That is discrimination. Mind you, there is no force of law behind it, but it is discrimination.

Originally posted by StiltonAre you guys all on crack? We're talking about Broadway performers here, right? What are the chances these performers are going to want to be connected in anyway with an official Party Convention for a bunch of politicians who want to write the rights of gay Americans out of the constitution. Refusing to perform for these politicians is their own way of peaceful protest.

You wouldn't happen to be insinuating that Broadway performers are gay, would you? I don't recall the article mentioning any of the performers boycotting because of the GOP's stance on gay rights.

I absolutely agree with the performers' (those who oppose the Republican party) right to protest. I also think it's hypocrisy at its best (worst). And every producer is well within his/her rights to fire each and every one of them that does not perform.

After thinking this over, I can justify both sides. A question, if they do this based purely on principal, wouldn't it be more hypocritical to work and take money from the Republicans? Many say liberals dtand for nothing so should we respect the stand?

Originally posted by DrDirtAfter thinking this over, I can justify both sides. A question, if they do this based purely on principal, wouldn't it be more hypocritical to work and take money from the Republicans? Many say liberals dtand for nothing so should we respect the stand?

I see where you're coming from, but I also can't help trying to imagine what my bosses attitude would be if I told him one night that I wasn't helping him cook for a certain table because I didn't agree with their political beliefs. I'm guessing at best I wouldn't have a job, at worst I wouldn't have all my fingers.

I guess I wouldn't feel hypocritical if I kept my yap shut because while I might disagree with someones politics, I still tend to respect their right to their beliefs. And besides I can't imagine that missing out on my cooking would suddenly lead them to seeing the error of their ways.